Monthly Archives: October 2008

Post navigation

You would think so if you listen to the vast majority of people you hear on a daily basis. I can’t stand people that bitch and moan about how it’s so ridiculous these profits these oil companies make when none of them can tell you the difference between gross profit and net profit. Sure ExxonMobil has had a record quarter for gross profit but guess who has really made out this year? The United States Federal Government has stolen nearly 100 billion dollars from ExxonMobil collected in the form of taxes.

Which brings me to my next point, people say “well these damn oil companies need to support us they make such a astronomical amount of money it makes me sick” well ladies and gentlemen pull your head from you rectum and realize that ExxonMobil or any big companies don’t pay any tax, YOU DO the end consumer, the CEO’s, the lazy union workers and on down the line are gonna make what they make regardless of how much they are taxed, they just pass the cost along to you. So the real target for aggresion is the US Federal Government, they are the reason your 401ks, and IRAs are hitting the crapper its because of the Federal Reserve. If you think that is rediculous than feel free to leave a comment or send me some email. [email protected] I never get tired of setting the record straight.

Share this:

1. McCain thought Bush’s warrantless-wiretap program circumvented the law; now he believes the opposite.

2. McCain insisted that everyone, even “terrible killers,” “the worst kind of scum of humanity,” and detainees at Guantanamo Bay, “deserve to have some adjudication of their cases,” even if that means “releasing some of them.” McCain now believes the opposite.

3. He opposed indefinite detention of terrorist suspects. When the Supreme Court reached the same conclusion, he called it “one of the worst decisions in the history of this country.”

14. McCain recently claimed that he was the “greatest critic” of Rumsfeld’s failed Iraq policy. In December 2003, McCain praised the same strategy as “a mission accomplished.” In March 2004, he said, “I’m confident we’re on the right course.” In December 2005, he said, “Overall, I think a year from now, we will have made a fair amount of progress if we stay the course.”

15. McCain has changed his mind about a long-term U.S. military presence in Iraq on multiple occasions, concluding, on multiple occasions, that a Korea-like presence is both a good and a bad idea.

17. McCain said before the war in Iraq, “We will win this conflict. We will win it easily.” Four years later, McCain said he knew all along that the war in Iraq war was “probably going to be long and hard and tough.”

18. McCain has repeatedly said it’s a dangerous mistake to tell the “enemy” when U.S. troops would be out of Iraq. In May, McCain announced that most American troops would be home from Iraq by 2013.

20. McCain staunchly opposed Obama’s Iraq withdrawal timetable, and even blasted Mitt Romney for having referenced the word during the GOP primaries. In July, after Iraqi officials endorsed Obama’s policy, McCain said a 16-month calendar sounds like “a pretty good timetable.”

Domestic Policy

21. McCain defended “privatizing” Social Security. Now he says he’s against privatization (though he actually still supports it.)

22. On Social Security, McCain said he would not, under any circumstances, raise taxes. Soon after, asked about a possible increase in the payroll tax, McCain said there’s “nothing that’s off the table.”

23. McCain wanted to change the Republican Party platform to protect abortion rights in cases of rape and incest. Now he doesn’t.

26. In 1998, he championed raising cigarette taxes to fund programs to cut underage smoking, insisting that it would prevent illnesses and provide resources for public health programs. Now, McCain opposes a $0.61-per-pack tax increase, won’t commit to supporting a regulation bill he’s co-sponsoring, and has hired Philip Morris’ former lobbyist as his senior campaign adviser.

28. McCain’s first mortgage plan was premised on the notion that homeowners facing foreclosure shouldn’t be “rewarded” for acting “irresponsibly.” His second mortgage plan took largely the opposite position.

35. In the Senate, McCain opposed a variety of measures on equal pay for women, and endorsed the Supreme Court’s Ledbetter decision. In July, however, McCain said, “I’m committed to making sure that there’s equal pay for equal work. That … is my record and you can count on it.”

36. McCain was against fully funding the No Child Left Behind Act before he was for it.

38. McCain said the Colorado River compact will “obviously” need to be “renegotiated.” Six days later, McCain said, “Let me be clear that I do not advocate renegotiation of the compact.”

Economic Policy

39. McCain was against Bush’s tax cuts for the very wealthy before he was for them.

40. John McCain initially argued that economics is not an area of expertise for him, saying, “I’m going to be honest: I know a lot less about economics than I do about military and foreign policy issues; I still need to be educated,” and “The issue of economics is not something I’ve understood as well as I should.” He now falsely denies ever having made these remarks and insists that he has a “very strong” understanding of economics.

41. McCain vowed, if elected, to balance the federal budget by the end of his first term. Soon after, he decided he would no longer even try to reach that goal. And soon after that, McCain abandoned his second position and went back to his first.

42. McCain said in 2005 that he opposed the tax cuts because they were “too tilted to the wealthy.” By 2007, he denied ever having said this, and falsely argued that he opposed the cuts because of increased government spending.

43. McCain thought the estate tax was perfectly fair. Now he believes the opposite.

44. McCain pledged in February 2008 that he would not, under any circumstances, raise taxes. Specifically, McCain was asked if he is a “‘read my lips’ candidate, no new taxes, no matter what?” referring to George H.W. Bush’s 1988 pledge. “No new taxes,” McCain responded. Two weeks later, McCain said, “I’m not making a ‘read my lips’ statement, in that I will not raise taxes.”

53. McCain was for national auto emissions standards before he was against them.

Immigration Policy

54. McCain was a co-sponsor of the DREAM Act, which would grant legal status to illegal immigrants’ kids who graduate from high school. In 2007, he announced his opposition to the bill. In 2008, McCain switched back.

56. In April, McCain promised voters that he would secure the borders “before proceeding to other reform measures.” Two months later, he abandoned his public pledge, pretended that he’d never made the promise in the first place, and vowed that a comprehensive immigration reform policy has always been, and would always be, his “top priority.”

Judicial Policy and the Rule of Law

57. McCain said he would “not impose a litmus test on any nominee.” He used to promise the opposite.

58. McCain’s position was that the telecoms should be forced to explain their role in the administration’s warrantless surveillance program as a condition for retroactive immunity. He used to believe the opposite.

63. In 2006, McCain sponsored legislation to require grassroots lobbying coalitions to reveal their financial donors. In 2007, after receiving “feedback” on the proposal, McCain told far-right activist groups that he opposes his own measure.

64. McCain supported a campaign-finance bill, which bore his name, on strengthening the public-financing system. In June 2007, he abandoned his own legislation.

65. In May 2008, McCain approved a ban on lobbyists working for his campaign. In July 2008, his campaign reversed course and said lobbyists could work for his campaign.

Politics and Associations

66. McCain wanted political support from radical televangelist John Hagee. Now he doesn’t. (He also believes his endorsement from Hagee was both a good and bad idea.)

67. McCain wanted political support from radical televangelist Rod Parsley. Now he doesn’t.

69. McCain is both for and against attacking Barack Obama over his former pastor at his former church.

70. McCain criticized TV preacher Jerry Falwell as “an agent of intolerance” in 2002, but then decided to cozy up to the man who said Americans “deserved” the 9/11 attacks.

71. In 2000, McCain accused Texas businessmen Sam and Charles Wyly of being corrupt, spending “dirty money” to help finance Bush’s presidential campaign. McCain not only filed a complaint against the Wylys for allegedly violating campaign finance law, he also lashed out at them publicly. In April, McCain reached out to the Wylys for support.

72. McCain was against presidential candidates campaigning at Bob Jones University before he was for it.

73. McCain decided in 2000 that he didn’t want anything to do with former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, believing he “would taint the image of the ‘Straight Talk Express.’” Kissinger is now the Honorary Co-Chair for his presidential campaign in New York.

74. McCain believed powerful right-wing activist/lobbyist Grover Norquist was “corrupt, a shill for dictators, and (with just a dose of sarcasm) Jack Abramoff’s gay lover.” McCain now considers Norquist a key political ally.

Share this:

For years now people such as G. Edward Griffin, Ron Paul, Eustace Mullins, and countless others have been warning everyone that the endgame of those in power is a one world government. Today it is not even kept under wraps anymore, the term “New World Order” which undoubtedly still conjures up pictures of tin foil hats in some peoples minds is now thrown around by some of the most powerful officials on the planet. We will have a one world government there is no doubt of that. However it is your duty to become informed and inform those around you so when the time is right, we the people can do what is right.

A good start would be to vote third party in this election, don’t choose between to globalists who are in it for big banks choose someone who will truely bring jobs back to America by kicking out the ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS and sealing our borders, repealing NAFTA and CAFTA, and reducing the amount of government robbery of the citizens.

These videos clearly show the EU is pushing for the next step in World Government you need to spread these videos around the net and expose these Globalists for who they are. This isn’t just some conspiracy!

Share this:

I’m not here because I hate another race, I’m here because I want to protect the culture, heritage and history of my people, I’m here because I want to secure a white future for my children, I want to secure them the best future I possibly can.

Most people read me wrong, which doesn’t frustrate me as much as it amuses me. They seem convinced I fit some sort of stereotype, that I’m some sort of knuckle dragging ape, isolated and ignorant from other races, socially inept, poor, bitter, angry, filled with hate, who was either brainwashed in to his views or formed them because of some unfortunate, unrepresentative incident in my past, someone who is lacking in self pride or self worth who needs to attack others to promote myself. They are wrong.

Obviously I’m not an ape, nor do my knuckles drag on the floor. I’m not going to sit here and over inflate myself, I am not the most intelligent person on the planet and it would be wrong of me to pretend I was, but I’m above average in intelligence, my IQ says this as does my qualifications and my lifetime achievements. Superman I’m not, but neither am I ignorant.

So, unable to place my views at the altar of ignorance, can I claim my perspective has been shaped by isolation?

It’s a common enough charge that people bring against nationalists, but I would argue my life has been far from isolated. I was born in England, but I’ve lived for large chunks of my life in Wales, Canada, USA, and other areas of Europe; on top of that I’ve visted four continents. I’ve been a White face in a majority Black world, I’ve been a White face in a majority White world, I’ve been to poor countries, I’ve been to rich countries, I’ve been to right wing places, I’ve been to left wing places — so left wing they’ve been Communist.

I’ve been to pro-West places and anti-West places, I’ve been to Protestant places, Catholic places, Muslim places, Orthodox places, Atheist places and places where they have their own forms of religion, completely alien to the West. I hardly feel that those credentials mark me out as someone who has lived an isolated life and is ignorant of other people, other cultures and other races. In fact I find it to be quite the opposite, I’ve noticed times when people of other races have been talking about their race and I’ve ended up being more racially aware of it than they are, because they have lived an isolated life.

So is it that old chestnut that I’m socially inept?

I read this one a lot in the media, they often say that White nationalists have difficulty mixing in society so they have to join some ultra far right cult to feel at home. Well again this doesn’t feel like it applies to me. I didn’t become a nationalist because I can’t make friends offline, in fact I didn’t become a nationalist to make friends at all, although having said that I have met many good people, in the Cause, that I do class as friends now.

I have always seemed to do quite well offline, I’ve travelled the world and met many people, of many nationalities, and had no problems making friends or interacting.

I read a study, a few years back, into how many “friends” we should have and of what type, I found myself to be in the sociable category of the results of that survey, not a party animal, but scoring slighty above average, which suggests to me there is no social ineptitude.

So is it to do with wealth or poverty?

Again this is a frequent argument used to beat White nationalists over the head with, but I’ve had a life that has allowed me to experience both wealth and poverty and all stations inbetween, so how could it be about money?

So am I angry, bitter, filled with hate?

I don’t think I am, I think I’m a sensitive person, acting and believing what I do out of love. I’m not here because I hate another race, I’m here because I want to protect the culture, heritage and history of my people, I’m here because I want to secure a White future for my children, I want to secure them the best future I possibly can. Why would I ever want anything less than that for them?

The next generation is far more important to me than my own life. I’ve lived long enough on this planet to know that changes will not be effected over night, therefore the majority of my life, if not all of it, will be lived in a world that I feel is harmful to myself and to my race and so the most important thing for me is not about the here and now, but about the future, about making sure I provide the best future that I am capable of securing for the next generation, not just my children, but all White children.

Another frequently leveled charge is that I’ve obviously been brainwashed, but again I find this hard to believe, I find it hard to believe not just because I am not a low intelligence person, but also because I find it hard to see who could have brainwashed me.

I obviously wasn’t brainwashed by the media, the movies, the newspapers, the schools, or the majority of books, as they all oppose me, so it would be easier to brainwash an anti than it would be to brainwash me using the mainstream media, so how was I brainwashed?

Was I brainwashed by peers?

Well I was never recruited to the ‘movement.’ I found my own way here, so there was no charasmatic figure that led me through deceit to this position, nor did I have friends with these views, before I formulated them myself, so I couldn’t have been brainwashed by peers.

Then am I lacking in self worth or self pride?

I’m sure some would laugh at that even being suggested here because I can be an arrogant bastard, full of myself sometimes. I don’t think I can be said to be lacking in self worth at all, and I have a lot of pride in what I’ve achieved in my life, so I think we can scratch that one from the list as well.

What about some incident in my past?

Was there an unrepresentative incident, involving a non-White that shaped my views?

Again, I have to answer no. There have been incidents in my past, more than I would have liked to experience, but I’ve also had bad experiences with White people as well; I’m not one of these people that claims all Whites are perfect angels and that life would suddenly be paradise if we were all segregated — my intelligence stretches beyond that sort of reasoning. No, I have had bad experiences, but they didn’t make me what I am today, and some of them I merely view as evidence, supporting the views that I had already formulated. But in the majority of cases I have viewed these incidents as being personal, isolated incidents that are representative of nothing.

If a dog bites me I don’t instantly believe that all dogs will bite me; in the same way if I have a bad experiance with a non-White, or a White, I don’t assume that that is typical behaviour representative of all. I tend to base my views on much more substantive evidence than that.

So am I attacking non-Whites to promote my own stock?

Hardly, because as I already stated I am not seeking to attack anyone, I’m seeking to defend the White race and I don’t believe that we have to wipe all the other races out to secure our future.

In a recent conversation I was talking with a Native Canadian. He is, by my definition, non-White. By the end of the discussion we were in agreement. We shared the view that the best thing for both our races was for us to live apart, so that our own cultures could prosper and flourish, we agreed that we were not each other’s enemies and that our common enemy was those who force us to integrate — they were the ones who threatened us, our heritage and our culture.

Was I attacking him to promote the White race?

I’m not a nationalist because I hate another race; I’m a nationalist because I want to protect the culture, heritage and history of my people; I’m a nationalist because I want to secure a White future for my children, I want to secure them the best future I possibly can. Why would I ever want anything less than that for them?

I came to the views that I have through independent means, through reasoning. I have sorted out all sources of knowledge, representing all sides of the debate; I have cogitated upon this information and come to my own conclusions. Everything I am ever told I question; everything I ever read I question; everything I ever hear I question. I don’t follow anyone or anything like a sheep. I make my own decisions and if I think something is wrong then I will say so. However I do think that the core principals of White nationalism are right. This is my view, based on all the evidence that I have found, or that has been presented to me.

Here’s a question for you: Why would I chose this route unless I was 120% sure it was right?

Being a non-nationalist is easy, everyday you say what the system wants to hear, that’s easy; being a White nationalist is hard. Every day of the year I say things the state hates to hear, I risk losing friends and jobs because of my views, I risk being sent to jail because of my views, I risk getting beaten up because of my views, I risk being murdered because of my views. Do you think I’d choose that path lightly?

I would love to be wrong. Suprised?

No seriously, I would love to be wrong, because if I was wrong then I could relax, I could live happily in the world knowing I had to do nothing but enjoy it to secure the future for the next generation. I wouldn’t have to worry about what a boss might think of my views, I wouldn’t be classed as one of the lowest forms of life on the planet, I wouldn’t risk the same beatings, or the same threats to my life, I wouldn’t have to worry about being sent to jail. That would be bliss. I would love to be wrong; but I’m right.

It’s been over five years since I heard a new argument from an anti — all the time I hear the same recycled junk.

I’ve almost begged those opossed to my views to show me why I’m wrong, to show me their vision of a better world, but 99.9% of them can offer nothing more than insults.

Now I ask you this, I believe that I am defending my culture, my people, my race, I want nothing more than to secure the future for the next generation of White people. And I am committed to that goal. How commited is a person that they can’t even answer a question when asked?

If a person truly believes he is right then shouldn’t he be willing to go to any lengths to ‘convert’ the people he meets?